A friend and I recently spent an hour or so dissecting the mind of the alt-right. Brian is a good workout buddy not only because he gets me to the gym, he also shows up with interesting topics.

This time around, he said he’d just had an epiphany: The members of the alt-right are frustrated pick-up artists whose misogyny fills them with hate.

In my experience this is pretty accurate, but I don’t think it’s quite that specific. I am, fortunately or unfortunately, pretty familiar with the alt-right. This is thanks to my early Internet adoption (when Usenet was one of the few interesting places), and several years of morbid fascination with 4chan.

My read is that young men (primarily) are led to the alt-right by a particular blend of toxic masculinity, animal instinct, and frustrated entitlement. Members of the alt-right are struggling with the very feelings of powerlessness and disillusionment they project onto left-wing “snowflakes.” It’s their chosen solution, a performative embrace of cultural talismans of power, that makes them pawns of fascism.

It all starts with the rules.

Male. White. Intelligent, but not TOO intelligent. Just a bit above average. Young — usually not older than 30, and often too young to drive. Tech savvy; gamers and programmers are over-represented. This may be a product of the alt-right’s primary recruiting channels (4chan, Usenet, and Reddit) or it may be something deeper. Notably, I do not believe sexual orientation plays a prominent role — in my non-scientific observation, there are just as many queers inside the alt-right as outside.

There are certainly exceptions to this profile. There are certainly women, older men, and people of color inside the alt-right, but they are far less common, and I believe them mostly outliers. In my theory they are drawn into a community created by angry white men, motivated by a sense of tribalism and a desire to belong.

As an intelligent white male who generally understands how systems work, your future alt-right member grows up feeling like the world should pretty much give him what he wants. They regard themselves as masters of the world, in a way. They know the rules, they understand how things work. My theory here is that programmers are especially prone because they’re especially rule-oriented. They write code, which dictates how the world operates today.

This is where stuff like “Seduction” arises. If you regard the real world as a sort of Matrix with underlying program you can manipulate, then it stands to reason there are cheat codes for stuff like social interaction and sex. A peacock, three negs, then going caveman should unlock the next level as surely as the Konami code.

When it doesn’t — when knowing the rules doesn’t pay off the way it should, in love or money or fame, and our future alt-right member feels he isn’t getting what the world owes him, the result is a powerful cognitive dissonance, frustration, and anger.

The alt-right is about performance, not belief.

Clearly, none of this functions without a baseline of toxic masculinity. But toxic masculinity in itself does not forge the alt-right; most, if not all men in the United States grow up with toxic masculinity. The path to the alt-right, like the path to the Dark Side, originates with how one handles that cognitive dissonance.

The alt-righter’s response is to blame the rules. Maybe they decide their failures stem from cultural bias in favor of women and people of color; maybe it’s just that the rules are inconsistent and unfair. One way or another, they decide they will no longer obey those rules. They are above the rules, outside of them. They’ve taken the red pill; they can see the Matrix.

This is why a key aspect of the alt-right is the performative aspect. It’s not sufficient to sit at home and quietly hold alt-right beliefs, or even to join like-minded conversations on Internet forums. No, to truly embrace the alt-right, one must troll social networks and confront strangers. With your pepe avatar and a ready arsenal of memes, you unload racist invective and display your lack of empathy like a peacock spreading his tail.

The motivation is pure ego defense. Rather than process feelings of inadequacy and failure, the alt-righter grasps onto some alternative iconography that makes him feel powerful; some stimulus that will generate a predictable response and restore his feeling of being in control. There is nothing in American culture that fits this definition more than bigotry.

This is why trolling is a definitive aspect of the alt-right. The specific content, the argument itself, is totally unimportant. The only important thing is to keep their attention and make them behave the way you predict. Specifically, to make them angry.

Spend some time on 4chan, and you will find threads in which young trolls share screenshots of long trolling sessions, which generate a collective laugh. The longer they can keep a conversation going, especially if the target of their trolling responds with escalating anger, the more powerful and successful the troll.

Within alt-right culture, the worst thing to do is show an emotional response to provocation. This grants power to your tormenter. Strength comes from stoicism, from being the first who can accuse the other, “U Mad, Bro?”

The alt-right worship the anti-hero.

Brian mentioned a letter he’d read from an alt-righter, praising the film Taxi Driver and suggesting its creator would appreciate the alt-right movement. My question to Brian was whether he thought the letter’s author recognized Travis Bickle as an anti-hero, or related to him as an ordinary protagonist.

Alt-righters worship anti-heroes, but especially those anti-heroes who express a declarative philosophy that puts them outside society. Heath Ledger’s Joker looms large, and alt-right memes and artwork often place members of the movement in the role of “wanting to watch the world burn.” There is no greater hero to the alt-right, however, than Fight Club’s Tyler Durden.

Rarely do members of the alt-right recognize the inherent tragedy of anti-heroes. Brian asked me whether I believe they even understand what an anti-hero is, or if they outright mistake them for the protagonist. Here he and I diverge; he thinks they know full well what an anti-hero is, and choose to embrace them. I think many of them mistake sociopathy for bold individualism, and (like stockbrokers quoting Gordon Gekko) completely miss the point.

From what I can tell, the alt-right recruits most followers when they are young. Very young. It begins during the early teens, when emotions and sex drive both run their hottest, and when feelings of shame and failure and inadequacy are at their most powerful.

The alt-right as chimps in a bonobo society

Brian drew a parallel between rape and alt-right membership, the thesis being that both are attempts to reclaim power after sexual rejection. That got me thinking, as often happens, about humans as animals and the influence of our baser instincts.

A dramatic and interesting contrast exists between our two closest animal relatives, chimpanzees and bonobos. Chimp society is violent, and stresses on chimp tribes often lead to brutal attacks. Bonobo society, in contrast, is entirely non-violent but hyper-sexualized. Introduce any stress to a bonobo group (a newcomer, a food source, or any other social disruption) and the response will be a literal orgy. They have literally replaced violence with sex as a means of social sorting.

Bear with me, I promise I’m going somewhere with this.

This leads to a question I’ve seen some raise: Are humans more chimp, or bonobo? We have traits in common with both. Look at the murder rate among our primitive ancestors, however, and an interesting trend emerges. Experts place the murder rate among the earliest true humans at a level consistent with most other mammals, but as our species evolved that rate shot up to 30 percent, extraordinarily high but consistent with other primate species — except bonobos. That rise in the murder rate correlates roughly with the concept of property ownership — the point at which many experts say humans turned from a matriarchal, free-love society to one where men expected to own access to reproductive resources (ie, women).

I’ll phrase that in a shorter, simpler way: When men decide they own women, they either get the sex to which they feel entitled, or they turn to violence. To be clear, I’m speaking of animal instincts here, so it should not be interpreted to excuse any behavior. We also have an instinct to shit wherever we stand, but to maintain a society we learn to use the toilet.

Here’s where we come back to the alt-right. See, that instinctive behavior, the idea of men owning women, the braggy, chest-puffing machismo is something American society, what some would describe as liberal society, has worked hard to purge. As a culture, we have deemed that unacceptable, but it retains a power over our animal instincts and urges. Humans will always be vulnerable to the political strongman for exactly that reason.

To the alt-right, that social compact by which we devalue machismo in favor of egalitarianism is just another rule they are above, one more aspect of the Matrix that those of us who are “blue pilled” cannot see. Thus they embrace sexism and male domination (“Gorilla Mindset,” if you will). They embrace tribalism in all its forms — racism, xenophobia, Islamophobia — and reassure themselves that anyone who claims otherwise is only pretending, only trying to abide by the rules.

This is not an especially new phenomenon; Rush Limbaugh is an early example of an alt-righter, with his screeds against the “Feminazis” who were “Pussifying” American society, and his rants about how liberals value consent above all else. Rush never particularly cared about what he was saying, as long as he could keep the attention of his listeners, and as long as their anger made him powerful. His politics were never defined by classical conservatism, but a performative display of lack of empathy. He, and his listeners, are classic alt-right.

From 4chan trolls to fascist pawns

Given this background, it isn’t hard to understand what attracts the alt-right to fascism and totalitarianism. Beyond a simple reinforcing of those base animal instincts, fascists are dedicated to the rules. By instituting draconian policies with no exceptions, the alt-right can reassert their mastery and control of the world they believe they understand.

Interact with them enough (hard as that can be) and you’ll gradually realize that their primary objection with liberals is that our compassion leads us to inconsistency. Because bleeding heart snowflakes are so concerned with people’s feelings, we make all kinds of exceptions that make the rules no longer apply.

Affirmative action gives people of color an unfair advantage over white people. Immigration is allowing outsiders access to limited resources that should go to real Americans. Women’s equality runs counter to the natural order and denies alpha men the sex to which they are entitled.

Way down deep, at the heart of it, is the same consistent theme of ego reassurance: The world hasn’t been fair to me. I haven’t received what I believe I deserve. I don’t want to feel like a failure.

This is, to me, the defining feature of the alt-right, the thing that sets them apart from conservatives, Republicans, true fascists, white nationalists, and the rest of the Right. It is perhaps ironic, perhaps predictable that it’s the exact accusation they most often level against their perceived enemies: They are special snowflakes who haven’t received the participation award they think they deserve.

The problem, of course, is they also become useful idiots for more nefarious forces — the true fascists, whose interest isn’t ego defense so much as actual power, or wealth, or racial purity. Your true motive is irrelevant when you’re embracing and voting for fascism and white nationalism; the end result will be the same.

Is there a practical lesson here?

So if we assume my theory holds — and I’ve done my best to sell it here — is there anything we can learn to undo the power of the alt-right?

I’m honestly not sure.

There are certainly lessons in how to deal with an alt-right troll:

Don’t take anything he says as an actual argument, but understand that the central goal is (a) to show you how he’s outside the rules, and (b) to feel powerful by taking up your time and triggering your emotions.

When an alt-right troll responds to something you say by demanding you “prove it” with links to news articles or other sources, understand that the motivation is just to waste more of your time and keep the conversation going. Nothing you link will prove anything.

Understand that the ultimate reward for the alt-right is a strong response of any kind. Milo Whathisname isn’t upset when his speeches are cancelled by massive protest, he’s delighted — because he made that happen, and it makes him and his followers feel powerful. 10,000 people got mad, bro!

Know that the best way to deal with the alt-right is to ignore them. Their deep insecurity and desire to feel powerful means something like an on-camera punch in the face will traumatize them, which is satisfying — but their need to reclaim power means such public embarrassment will motivate them to terrible ends. Were Richard Spencer not in the public eye, I would fully expect his next action to be a shooting spree or bombing.

As to preventing their rise? Keep an eye on your kids, I guess. If the primary motivator is avoiding feelings of inadequacy and powerlessness, then our best hope is to teach our children how to process those feelings in a healthy way.

I guess what I’m saying is we’re all counting on those Feminazis to Pussify the country before it’s too late.

Chris is an author, artist, personal trainer, and long-time nonprofit fundraiser. His work has appeared in The Nib, GOOD, the Huffington Post, Salon, MTV, and numerous other publications. Chris lives in New York City.

4 COMMENTS

Thanks for writing this. You’ve done a great deal to expound on the motivation behind the desire for people to affiliate with the alt-right, which I see less as an actual political movement and more as a loose cultural collective ; these people might vote Trump, but largely out of that sense of spite you articulated so thoroughly. I think they also admire his willingness to defy conventional political norms: his ego is now so inflated (and why wouldn’t it be?) that any advice contrary to his own thinking, especially to tone his rhetoric or actions down, he sees as an affront to his own brilliance. The alt-right despise “political correctness” for the same reasons they adore trolling: they are driven so thoroughly by spite, that, unlike Travis Nicole, “God’s lonely man”, they feel like they now do belong to a collective whose goals are to insult, berate, and degrade those who don’t like to insult, berate or degrade others, and who don’t like hearing others subjected to insulting, berating or degrading treatment.
I don’t think, like many Republicans, that they have long felt like political correctness is an affront to free speech. These are young men, like you said, who have no experience of debate outside the Internet, on forums where political correctness is basically a non-sequitur. They are not fighting FOR anything. The dominant social shift during the lifetime of most millennials has been toward inclusiveness, tolerance, and acceptance. These alt-right youngsters would, if the trend were the other direction, be attacking bigotry in the same cynical way they now promote it.
It is a phenomenon seen, actually, in young online denizens of left and right political persuasion and in some ways, is separate from politics altogether. I have seen both Bernie supportere, and Trump supporters, deride earnest interlocutors with the same bizarre slurs: “snowflake”, “SJW” and “cuck”. These phrases seem to dominate YouTube arguments, for instance, to the point of saturation. They seem to have lost meaning. They are now all synonymous with “feminised”, and so, synonymous with “weak”.

I think most, possibly all, these young men really want what they are, in their minds, entitled to: female affection. A young male in the 18 to 25 age bracket, who sees himself as denied what his more well integrated peers are not, can be extraordinarily angry and destructive. Bickle is a great example, not because he is fictional but because he was written so accurately as the depiction of the lonely, angry young man: while the online alt-right youth are drawn to the vague sense of tribal belonging bestowed by their use of words like “cuck”, their attraction to people who “don’t give a fuck”, their derision of anyone too earnest as “SJWs” and so on, I think all humans need real social contact, and online identities cannot substitute for real ones, no matter how hard people try.

Bickle was written based on Arthur Bremer’s diaries and yet nearly every young, angry loner shares a great deal with the character. John B Hinckley, who idolised the film and the main character, and who attempted to kill President Reagan, supposedly accosted Taxi Driver screenwriter Paul Schrader, angrily demanding how Schrader had taken Hinckley’s life and copied it as the basis for the film. Schrader says he told Hinckley that he himself -and lots of other people – feel or have felt the same way, at some stage in their lives. Schrader does say Bickle is, in part, autobiographical. Schrader’s answers had no soothing influence on Hinckley, it seems, because he shot Reagan not long after questioning the screenwriter.

I think the Schrader-Hinckley conflagration is a testament to the strength of the character, though.

But more potent still are the sentiments of Arthur Bremer, transformed into Travis Bickle’s words and thoughts. Bremer shot and paralysed segregationist Governor and Presidential candidate George Wallace during the 1972 campaign, but not for any political reason -he had wanted to shoot other candidates, and even President Nixon, but couldn’t get close enough to any target except Wallace.

He wanted to try to show himself, and others, that he wasn’t the failure he ultimately believed himself to be. He wanted to defy his own sense of impotence, and shame. He wanted to do something big and bold and brash. These young men always have the same motivation: if they cannot achieve adoration or at least, positive recognition for their achievements (because they themselves are typically convinced that they are insignificant), then they will achieve infamy, which is, to them, better than continuing to be ignored. Best to be loved, but being hated will do.
This deep need for a sense of accomplishment and more importantly, recognition, is the same need that drives some young men to join terrorist groups, and to commit heinous acts of violence via those means: Jihadi John, the brutal young English ISIS mass killer made infamous by the ISIS beheading videos is, I think, a good example of the sort of person I’m talking about. While the young IRA member Martin McGuiness viewed himself as a soldier defending his Catholic community in Derry, within the broader framework of an ongoing struggle for Irish freedom, people like Jihadi John, or the Boston Bombers (particularly the elder Tsarnaev brother), are ignorant of history and simply want infamy to supplant their own sense of impotence.

Those members of the alt-right, as you’ve discussed, are not much different. Instead of embracing violence, they’ve opted to assuage their feelings of insignificance, malaise and indignation by embracing a different sort of shallow nihilism: less about becoming widely recognised and despised, they seem more driven by the online zeitgeist, and perhaps to some degree, they adopt the language and some of the components of politics because those aspects have dribbled down to the cultural sewer these people inhabit. Mostly they seem to influence each other. Some try self improvement, but mostly, the movement seems about a false sense of cynicism. Easy to affect at 18, less easy at 25, still moreso at 30.

I worry that the rate of suicide and self harm will rise as these young men get older: but perhaps this is their balm, their elixir that soothes the sense of pathos that otherwise dominates their lives. Perhaps they will stay online for good, and in a way, I think that might not be a bad thing in the medium to long term. It is certainly better outcome than a spate of suicides.
Better yet of course is to help these guys realise that their toxic self perceptions – about their their physical appearance, their lack of female affection, their lack of achievement, their lack of direction and meaning – are only harmful because they choose to accept their thoughts and beliefs as objective reality. When, in fact, their convictions are not necessarily true, and they probably have more in common with the well rounded, well integrated, earnest high achievers they despise so much.

I hope you’ll forgive my wordiness and spelling errors, I wrote that on my phone, on the fly, so, it is basically just my thoughts, transcribed. Some of the meaning is a bit muddled and confused. I meant to say, for instance, that many Republicans and libertarians tend to abhor political correctness because they view it as imposing on their right to free speech. Whereas alt-right members don’t care about free speech. They have never had their freedom of speech denied, because they argue on the Internet where freedom of speech is a given. They don’t worry, like many on the right wing do, about popular culture war canards, like big government imposing on free speech. They don’t even know what the culture wars are, nor recognise that they are foot soldiers within that war. They don’t care much about abortion, but they are undeniably driven by an undertone of hostility toward women. The whole “red pill”/MGTOW trend exemplifies this. They are not ‘going their own way’: the idea is a contradiction in terms. A better term would be ‘young men trying to live without the female attention they crave so much, except the attention they continue to receive from their mothers, aunts, sisters and so on’. Not as catchy, but more accurate.
I’d be very interested to read your thoughts on the “red pill/MGTOW” subculture, that exists either as part of, or in tandem with, the alt-right.
I myself have sadly spent too long reading about these guys, because, frankly, I find it interesting, and, because I am a pathological procrastinator!
Thanks again for your post. I wish there was more online like it. I’m not going to have a look and a read over the rest of your site. You write well and on topics that don’t often receive critical attention. Because these guys dominate online discussion, and they spend so much time online, they tend to dilute, divert or alter any discussion of these issues. I don’t post on Reddit but perhaps that is another outlet for reasonable examination of these aspects of modern culture.
All the best and thanks again,
Jamir

Archives

Travel and Photography

Christopher Keelty is a writer, artist, personal trainer and nonprofit fundraiser based in New York City. Cartoons and writing have appeared at The Nib, Fusion, Salon, the Huffington Post, MTV.com, among other sites and publications.
For personal training information, visit rewritefitness.com.